Talk:Nanite
Self-aware? can nanites really be classes as self-aware ? to me they seem to be just small machines that need to be programed for a task, not like data that is really a self-aware machine that can operate on his own. :Yes, you are right. In real life, a nanite could not be self aware because they are very simple chemical/mechanical machines designed for a task, not computers. However, in the fantasy of a this Trek episode they became self aware so the article reflects this. The writers were not scientists, the were paid imagination. Star Trek is a much fantasy as Lord of the Rings, and any idiot who says it is based on science should be ignored, because - it - obviously - is - not. Sorry for the rant. --Bp 07:42, 27 May 2006 (UTC) Anime references :Moved from MA:PFD ; Oneamisu receiver, Ranma ½ gyro block, Otomo calibration : While the source for their names may be correct, the articles in their current form should not be kept. If someone knows what these things are supposed to be, perhaps they can expand it... they need to do it within the next five days, though. If not, we should delete these. --From Andoria with Love 04:13, 2 June 2006 (UTC) * '''Delete', should remain red links. Jaz talk 04:17, 2 June 2006 (UTC) *'Keep'. I formatted the articles a little. Obviously they are all jokes put in the LCARS display by Micheal Okuda, an anime fan. The articles deserve to exist as much as any specifically named item in Star Trek, even if it is just to explain the reference in a background note. --Bp 05:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :*So they're all imporant components of a nanite. Well, if that's all we know about them then keep, I guess. --From Andoria with Love 07:30, 2 June 2006 (UTC) ::Not just important, particularly important! There are other such minimal definitions. But again, they are specifically named canon references! --Bp 07:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :*Indeed. ;) --From Andoria with Love 08:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC) ::Keep as reformatted. Aholland 11:23, 2 June 2006 (UTC) *As I said on Talk:Otomo calibration, an alternative to keeping the articles would be to merge&redirect on Nanite. This has nothing to do with canon, just with the simple fact that not each and every one-line article really needs to have a separate article. In any case, don't delete. -- Cid Highwind 11:32, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :*Would anybody be against me archiving this to Talk:Nanite rather than placing it on the talk pages for all three articles? --From Andoria with Love 20:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC) Nanite components :Moved from Talk:Otomo calibration To clear some matters up: I originally added the components to the nanite article but decided not to put them on the episode page-reference list or to interlink them as that would lead to 15 articles stating "The XXX is an integral part of a nanite" and that's it. We don't know anything else about those things (apart from three of them being anime references, and that can easily be put as background on the nanite page) so they really shouldn't get their own pages. :I took the information (which was not legible on screen) from the Star Trek: The Next Generation - The Continuing Mission where the LCARS display was reprinted and the tiny bits of text were legible. According to the current canon policies, this is a viable source for an article, just like with all the dedication plaque names, which were also not legible on screen. But still I think that those nanite parts don't deserve their own articles for the reasons stated above. --Jörg 08:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC) ::Makes sense, if all those components were never mentioned in any other context. If nothing more is known about them, then we probably don't need more than the list that already is available here. Still, I think these article should then be kept as redirects to nanite, to allow searching for and linking to the individual components. -- Cid Highwind 09:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :::I support Cid's suggestion from about 2 years ago. :)--31dot 17:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC) :I support the merge with Nanite and keep the terms as redirects. component canonicity :Moved from Talk:Ranma ½ gyro block I think this may also be non-canon. There is no reference as to where this is from. --OuroborosCobra 02:38, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :The above was apparently solved - I'm still not sure about the use of a special character in the title, though. At least we should create a redirect title without such a character (for both searching and easier linking). Possible suggestions:Ranma 1/2 gyro block, Ranma half gyro block, Ranma gyro block. -- Cid Highwind 08:51, 2 June 2006 (UTC) ::To clear some matters up: I originally added the components to the nanite article but decided not to put them on the episode page-reference list or to interlink them as that would lead to 15 articles stating "The XXX is an integral part of a nanite" and that's it. We don't know anything else about those things (apart from three of them being anime references, and that can easily be put as background on the nanite page) so they really shouldn't get their own pages. ::I took the information (which was not legible on screen) from the Star Trek: The Next Generation - The Continuing Mission where the LCARS display was reprinted and the tiny bits of text were legible. According to the current canon policies, this is a viable source for an article, just like with all the dedication plaque names, which were also not legible on screen. But still I think that those nanite parts don't deserve their own articles for the reasons stated above. --Jörg 08:55, 2 June 2006 (UTC) :::I don't really see a problem with keeping them. They were seen on-screen, which makes them canon until otherwise contradicted. --From Andoria with Love 12:46, 2 June 2006 (UTC) ::::Re: Cid, renaming -- How is that name "Ranma ½" (not familiar with that franchise myself) pronounced in its own release: "Ranma one-half" or "Ranma half"? -- The preferred pronunciation for the original source reference would seem best. I wouldn't support "Ranma 1/2" because it would make the software sometimes believe that "2 gyro block" was a subpage of "Ranma 1" -- Captain M.K.B. 14:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC) Made in China? (j/k about the heading) But I think Dr. Stubbs mentions where Federation nanites are made but I can't quite make it out. Something like "...a plant in Dakar, Senegal..." but somebody would have to verify that. Anyone? -- TrekFan Talk 23:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC) ::Consider it confirmed, that's what he said. :) --31dot 23:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)